DRAGON+ Now Available For Ratings

I must admit, I don't personally get some of the reactions to DRAGON+, the mobile app from WotC which launched in April. It's described as "...your official mobile source for all-things Dungeons & Dragons. This free app for iPhone or iPad has everything you want to know about D&D in one easy place. In addition to ongoing up-to-the minute news updates, every second month you’ll enjoy a new issue of Dragon+ showcasing what’s new in Dungeons & Dragons – from backstory and world information to discussions about what’s coming next with the creators and developers of your favorite D&D products." I think it does pretty much exactly what is says it'll do; it's not a content platform, it's one of those "brand news" apps which every company has these days. Perfectly normal. I think it's the name which is causing issues, because - being named after a magazine which published gaming content - people were disappointed that this wasn't that. I'm not personally interested in it, but I don't resent its existence. It's not really designed for folks who are up to date with the latest morsel or tweet from the D&D team.

Anyhow, I know that many people disagree (some pretty strongly) with my take on the apps, so the first two issues are available on iOS and Android now, and both can be commented on and rated in the reviews section here on EN World. Enjoy! Feel free to rate each issue as it comes out, and leave comments.

​

 

[Morrus]

Oh I have no problem with opposing views. I just don't understand the notion that we are supposed to like it because it's free.

I've not seen that posted anywhere. Yes, it would be an odd thing to say.

 

[MartyW]

You pretty much answered your question. The app is for people who aren't well informed about D&D. You know, people who aren't on ENworld, the D&D forums, Facebook, etc, but are interested in D&D.

Except that those people will never download the app. If I'm not well-informed about D&D, I'm not going to know that there's a "Dragon+" app that has anything to do with D&D.

Which means, the ONLY people who are downloading this app are people who already know about these things because they visit the Wizards.com site and hit social media related to D&D topics.

So the target audience is apparently a group of people who will never download the app.

That makes absolutely no sense... which, now that I think about it, is fairly typical of WotC's digital strategy.

 

[Thac0 the Barbarian]

The one caveat to that is that I think it is becoming less and less unusual for people to find an app as their primary entrance into a brand, rather than website. Therefore there may be new players who find Dragon simply because they are searching through an app store, rather than entering App Store because they were directed to from some other location. Honestly, for all of the "magazine" portion of dragon plus is fluff, I find the aggregator portion that compiles all the other postings quite valuable and much easier then going to the website, particularly from mobile device.

Dictated but not proofread, so please forgive typos and missed Stevens

 

[Mistwell]

Your post count (this being the 3rd) and measured call to be reasonable smack of working at WotC. WotC is pulling the classic bait and switch by naming it Dragon (40 years of great magazine content) and expecting those who loved the previous application under the same name to accept/like it.

EDIT: Yeah this guy likely works at WotC, read his posts.

I think people with 35 posts total should not be harping on people for having a low post count.

 

[MartyW]

The app is fine - it's basically the same as their website

If that were actually the case, the app would be waaaaay better than it is. I'd love to see articles like Arcana Unearthed show up in the "magazine"

The Wizards Dragon for 4th edition was only interesting in the setting materials they published for their Nentir Vale setting - other than that it was regurgitating the same ideas "but now for 4e" (and admittedly even a lot of the Nentir Vale stuff they published fell into the "here's something that has been in the game forever, but we're going to reimagine it for this new setting in some way" that was hit or miss).

I have to disagree here. I found the 4e Dragon to be pretty good. Not quite as good as the 2e era printed version, but pretty darn good. Even the "retread for 4e" articles were quite useful in my mind. The 4e version of Dungeon was fantastic... As good as the print Dungeon of old. (I know that's a tangent, but worth noting).

What would they be doing with a Dragon magazine these days? Likely regurgitating articles they've done for all of the previous iterations of the game "but now for 5e"!

I would gladly take than over what we're getting now. I'd take any content useful for tabletop play. Right now, there's none.

That, I believe, is the crux of the problem people have with Dragon+. It's not just the name. It's that there hasn't been a single article that has brought anything new for the tabletop game. Even the Goliath article in issue one was just a reprint of what was already in the player's PDF for Elemental Evil.

I would settle for even one article per issue that would give us something for the tabletop play. I'd want more, but I'd settle for one.

 

[MartyW]

I think people with 35 posts total should not be harping on people for having a low post count.

He wasn't harping on the person for having a low post count. He was making the assumption that the low post count (in addition to the inferred cheerleading) might be evidence of astroturfing (like a Reputation.com poster or WotC employee).

I don't agree that it was astroturfing, but the critique was not about the number of posts.

 

[Morrus]

The one caveat to that is that I think it is becoming less and less unusual for people to find an app as their primary entrance into a brand, rather than website. Therefore there may be new players who find Dragon simply because they are searching through an app store, rather than entering App Store because they were directed to from some other location.

That's the basic theory, yep. It's targeted at a specific market segment not currently getting any D&D info; it's a growing segment, and it's very normal for a company to target it in exactly this way.

Honestly, it'd be dumb not to do this. Assuming people will visit your website is very 2012.

 

[Mistwell]

He wasn't harping on the person for having a low post count. He was making the assumption that the low post count (in addition to the inferred cheerleading) might be evidence of astroturfing (like a Reputation.com poster or WotC employee).

I don't agree that it was astroturfing, but the critique was not about the number of posts.

If that is the logic...then why would we trust his post given it's subject to the same criticism? Couldn't he be presumed to work for a competitor and have a vested interest in bashing Wizards?

Mind you, I think the logic is deeply flawed - but if you accept it at face value, then he's the last person that should be making that comment.

 

[Agamon]

If that were actually the case, the app would be waaaaay better than it is. I'd love to see articles like Arcana Unearthed show up in the "magazine"

Though I think they could maybe improve the content somewhat, I personally wouldn't care for this. I wouldn't want gaming material tucked away inside a cumbersome app. I hope they stick to fluffy read-and-done articles.

 

[dd.stevenson]

Yes, it's the name.